[Catherine J. Frompovich – Cell Phone Ban in Schools (Jean-Michel Blanquer, Philippe Tournier, Luc Chatel, Gerard Pommier, Emmanuel Macron) – Doctor Martin L. Pall – EMFs – Perry Kendall – Sharon Noble Comments on Michelle Mungall Reply Letter re BC Hydro Itron Smart Meters (BCUC, Costs, Fires, FortisBC, Health Canada Safety Code 6, IEEE, James McNamee, Lifespan, Measurement Canada, RF, Safety, Transmissions per Day, Warranty) – SmartPhone Addiction – Studies – Write to Nina Beety re Requests for EHS / EMS / ES Accommodation (ADA, City Hall, Library) | BC – France – Monterey, California, USA]
1) Dr. Martin Pall has gathered 155 studies / reviews that show health effects from non-thermal radiation, going back more than 50 years. With all the references, there are many 1,000s of cited studies. This certainly makes for some interesting references but also an excellent refutation of assertions made by people like Perry Kendall that there is no evidence of harm.
(click on photos to enlarge)
10.12.2017 by emily Category Electromagnetic Health Blog
“Among the scientific reviews documenting these various non-thermal health effects are 155 that follow. Each of these reviews cites at least a dozen primary literature citations showing non-thermal effects, with many citing 100 or more going up to the 3rd reference which cites over 1000 such citations. It can be seen from this that the primary literature citations supporting the existence of various non-thermal health effects cited in these reviews go into several thousands. This list is not and is not intended to be a list of all important such reviews. However it gives some measure of the size of the literature that contradicts the industry contention that there are no non-thermal effects of microwave frequency EMFs.”
2) Below in Letters is a response from Energy Minister Mungall to a member who wrote about concerns with smeters. I have made comments (in black) to refute her statements – she clearly knows nothing about the program, has taken no time to look at the problems we’ve been writing about, no time to even look at the financial implications. She is mouthing whatever BC Hydro has told her which is the same thing the Liberals said. It’s time she took her responsibility seriously and educated herself. She obviously needs our help.
Michelle Mungall <firstname.lastname@example.org>
3) Cell phones will not be allowed to be used at all in schools in France, even during lunch breaks. The minister says that children should not be in front of screens for “health” reasons, but this article does not address tablets or Wi-Fi.
France to impose total ban on mobile phones in schools
“France is to impose a total ban on pupils using mobile phones in primary and secondary schools starting in September 2018, its education minister has confirmed.
Phones are already forbidden in French classrooms but starting next school year, pupils will be barred from taking them out at breaks, lunch times and between lessons…
But for the education minister the issue of mobile phones and tablets is a matter of “public health”. “It’s important that children under the age of seven are not in front of these screens,” he added.”
4) Here are the initial sources for the articles in www.NEWAGORA.CA that I mentioned in last night’s update.
5) Please see the email below from Nina Beety who lives in California. In the USA, EHS is acknowledged by the Americans with Disabilities Act. https://safehelpsyou.org/2016/07/18/electrosensitivity-recognized-as-a-disability-by-the-ada/
Yet Nina is having to fight for accommodation when she visits public facilities such as City Hall. She has been asked if other cities, provinces, etc. make accommodations. She would appreciate it if you have any information you can share.
She asked me to share and if anyone who has requested accommodation would contact her regarding the response to that request.
From: Nina Beety <email@example.com>
On Friday, the Monterey Disabled Access Appeals Board denied my ADA appeal for reasonable accommodation to use city hall and the city library. The Board was unwilling even to direct staff to put up a sign outside city council chambers asking people to turn off their cell phones, like the sign outside the Monterey County Board of Supervisors’ chambers.
Three questions arose during the hearing:
1) Had Monterey’s ADA coordinator received requests from anyone else with electromagnetic sensitivities? No, he hadn’t.
2) Did the ADA coordinator know if other cities and counties had policies for EMS accommodation? Yes, he had talked with various local governments, and they did not have policies for EMS accommodation.
3) Had those cities and counties received requests from people with electromagnetic sensitivities? No, they had not received requests from those who are EMS.
So, the board refused reasonable accommodation to me in part because they can get away with it politically, because people with EMS are not asking for what they need and are entitled to under ADA rules. Under ADA, it doesn’t matter if one or 50 people make a request, local governments are supposed to accommodate them. But if relatively few EMS-disabled people are willing to speak up, EMS will continue to be seen as an “orphan” disability – rare and unusual – and the culture at large can deny that this functional impairment exists, let alone that it is growing.
I’d like to know which local governments are granting accommodation now or have EMS-friendly policies.
I’d also like to know which local governments have received requests and have denied them.
In three months, the Monterey board will examine whether it should broaden accommodations including for those with EMS, and has asked city staff to bring information about impacts that would happen to other disabled people, programs, and costs. Based on the input from board and staff on Friday, unless something dramatically changes, the staff presentation will be loaded with “impossible, too costly, disrupts access for other disabled groups, disrupts the public’s access, disrupts city programs, disrupts media access” with the final conclusion to keep the status quo.
The board had only 4 members present Friday. Only one was a disabled person. Two members (one of them a politically powerful former Planning Commissioner) were from the building industry and have to deal with the city for project approvals, which means they have to play nice with the city. The fourth member was a former Monterey city staff person – part of the system. The board composition made objectivity and independence impossible.
Dear Mr. X
Thank you for taking the time to write on August 29 and 30, 2017 requesting clarification following my August 28, 2017 response to you regarding BC Hydro’s Smart Meter Program. I understand that you also wrote more recently to Honourable George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, on this issue.
All electricity meters must pass federal and North American standards set by Measurement Canada, the American National Standards Institute, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the International Electrotechnical Commission. All BC Hydro meters comply with the applicable standards.
These standards do not include many of the features of the ITRON smart meter, e.g. the remote disconnect switch that has been the cause of many fires, or the lack of power surge protection. Measurement Canada’s standards pertain to accuracy only.
The Itron meter in use by BC Hydro’s Smart Meter Program has received federal government certification. The BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) confirmed in a 2013 decision regarding the same technology that the human exposure limits under Health Canada Safety Code 6 is the relevant standard regarding radio frequency emissions and the potential for impact to health.
The only federal certification that program received was from Measurement Canada. Regarding the radiation, Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 does not apply to the type of radiation emitted by smart meters. Even Dr. James McNamee, head of the radiation department of Health Canada, admitted that Safety Code 6 is protective for thermal radiation only. Smart meters emit non-thermal radiation. http://www.magdahavas.com/health-canada-admits-safety-code-6-guideline-for-microwave-radiation-is-based-only-on-thermal-effects/
Safety Code 6 itself says that it applies only to workers at and visitors to federally regulated sites. Our homes are not federally regulated sites. Safety Code 6 is a guideline only and, based upon more than 23,000 studies showing harmful effects due to exposure, British Columbia could establish lower standards.
Health Canada reviews Safety Code 6 regularly. While over time, the standard may change and the way meters communicate may change, BC Hydro must ensure the smart meter technology it uses operates within Safety Code 6. For example, Health Canada made Safety Code 6 more stringent in 2015 and BC Hydro implemented technical updates to the smart meter system in that year. Follow-up studies undertaken to demonstrate compliance are described on BC Hydro’s website, specifically at:
In this first link ITRON says the signal is .5millisecond long for 2.65 seconds a day, and in the second link Itron admits that there will be ON AVERAGE 3 minutes of signals a day. Which is true? To calculate the number of signals:
1000 milliseconds in a second. Take 2.65 seconds a day of signals = 2650 milliseconds and signals of .5 millisecond long = 5300 signals a day, or 221 an hour or 3.7 a minute or one every 16 seconds.
If there are 3 minutes of signals per day: 180 seconds = 180,000 milliseconds, and 360,000 signals a day or 4 signals a second.
Which is true? Either one means that ITRON meters are sending signals virtually constantly.
I had additional info in an update months ago. https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/z/2016-09-23-important-info-itron-info-says-the-average-smeter-emits-4-signals-a-second/
To top this off, the level of RF emissions as given to the public and perhaps Mungall are significantly understated. Look at the levels that ITRON itself admits.
Summation of Power Densities – Simultaneous Transmissions
This device contains multiple transmitters which can operate simultaneously and therefore the maximum RF exposure is determined by the summation of power densities. The 900 MHz LAN and 2.4GHz Zigbee radio can operate simultaneously there it is appropriate to include both of those power density values in the summation of power densities.The maximum power density is calculated by a summation of power densities for each simultaneous transmission combination as follows:
900MHz LAN: 0.227 (mW/cm^2) = 227 microwatts per centimeter squared. SC 6 limits allow 274 or 83% allowable limits
2.4GHz Zigbee: 0.031 (mW/cm^2) = 31 microwatts per centimeter squared. SC 6 limits allow 535.
TOTAL: 0.258 (mW/cm^2) = 258 microwatts per centimeter squared. I believe the lower frequency limit is used in situations like this. This is 94% of SC 6 allowable limits.
I note your concern about apparent data discrepancies from different information sources. I have been advised that the data you refer to are not comparable. However, if you are concerned about BC Hydro’s compliance with Safety Code 6, you may make a complaint to the BCUC. Information on their complaint process can be found at: http://www.bcuc.com/consumers/utility-icbc-complaint-process.html.
Based on the data before the BCUC during the complaint process, the BCUC found “no evidence that smart meters materially increase the risk of fires in BC over analog and digital meters.”
However, the BCUC directed BC Hydro and FortisBC to report on a semi-annual basis to the BCUC regarding “all incidents where a meter and/or meter base is reasonably assessed to be the possible or likely source of a high temperature or fire event that results in the meter and/or meter base requiring replacement.”
Obviously she has not read the Fire Report I sent her. BCUC did not determine no evidence existed. It was thanks to the evidence I provided that BCUC began to require BC Hydro and FortisBC to report on incidents. In my report I have proven that BCUC is being irresponsible by relying on an single report that was paid for by BC Hydro. That report was based on poor, incomplete data and made insupportable conclusions. It is her responsibility to ensure that BC Hydro equipment is safe. She has a duty to read the info in the report for herself.
On December 21, 2016, BC Hydro filed with the BCUC, further to BC Hydro’s Fiscal 2017‑Fiscal 2019 Revenue Requirements Application (RRA), the “Smart Metering and Infrastructure Program Completion and Evaluation Report,” which includes a review of matters related to the SMI about which that you have expressed concerns. This report can be found at: http://www.bcuc.com/Documents/Proceedings/2016/DOC_48502_B-1-4_BCH-Appx-P-Update-SMI-Report.pdf.
Does she know that the program is not done yet? BC Hydro admits that there are at least 50,000 smart meters that are manually read? Also that there are many analogs still on homes. This report is obviously incomplete and, as is usual with BC Hydro, totally misleading.
Like any electronic equipment, smart meters will need to be replaced over time. I understand that BC Hydro anticipates having to replace 10,000 smart meters a year (out of a total of 1.93 million smart meters) for the next four years through the normal course of business, such as broken screens, software upgrades, and exterior damage. I understand these replacements are covered under warranty with the meter vendor.
She doesn’t know that 88,000 were replaced in January 2016? http://theprovince.com/news/b-c-hydro-must-remove-more-than-88000-smart-meters And these are NOT covered by warranty. BC Hydro says it will cost $220 per meter replacement. Does she realize that the lifespan is only 5-7 years?? https://smartgridawareness.org/?s=testimony
Once again, thank you for writing. I appreciate the opportunity to hear from you about this important issue. It helps inform my work within the Ministry, and your engagement is crucial to our democracy.
Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet.”
~ Alice Walker